Newspapers and their delivery are decidedly not with the times. Creating a bloated mechanism upon which to sell advertising around stories that I have already either heard or read earlier in the day makes it viable no more. Magazines should probably worry about saving their own sorry asses. Cutting down trees to make a lot of yesterday's news on paper... naw...
Niche magazines will be with us for a while. Interior Design, Art, Nature, Cigars, Boating... they have a market that is more about the content on a longer draw. But the news magazines? Naw... screw 'em.
Like Rob says... I couldn't care less if Time or Newsweek make it. They have an out of date delivery system of material that is stale by the time I get it. And the advertisers are paying hundreds of thousands for the chance to sit on a coffee table in a dentists waiting room. Fools. For the kind of money that is spent on one months ad run, a company could present a multiplicity of online games, surveys, town halls... a ton of things. All built to engage instead of sitting there for eyeballs to glance at.
Rob at APE has some thoughts as well. Read them all.
A Photo Editor - Magazines Try To Save Newspapers:
"I have several thoughts to contribute:
1. The monopoly is over. The cost of delivering advertising to to consumers along with words and pictures is now nearly zero. Advertisers paid whatever you told them to pay because the delivery method was expensive and complicated. Nobody gives a rats ass if the billionaire owners go somewhere else. Turning journalism into a break even industry is perfectly fine with editors, writers and photographers. I could go on and on about the decisions that are made by owners that put advertising and attracting easy readers first. My reasons for not reading Time Magazine anymore is certainly tied to their attempts to attract more readers (to serve to advertisers) at the expense of the quality of the product."
No comments:
Post a Comment